skills/ transilienceai/communitytools

hackerone

HackerOne bug bounty automation - parses scope CSVs, deploys parallel pentesting agents per asset, validates PoCs, and generates platform-ready submission reports.

0
Installs
—
Rating
—
Success rate
7
Files scanned
Scan passedsecurity
Source on GitHub

Security scan

Scan passed

No risky patterns were found in the scanned files.

7 files scannedscanner v1.2.0Oct 11, 2026

Content sha256 4d908a0d7ab5a117… — run codexguild_scan_skills after installing to verify your local copy.

Static analysis is a first line of defense, not a guarantee. Read the source

SKILL.md

exact scanned copy

HackerOne Bug Bounty

Automates: scope parsing → parallel testing per asset → authoritative finding validation → submission reports.

Quick start

  1. Input: HackerOne program URL or scope CSV.
  2. Parse scope and program guidelines.
  3. Spawn one coordinator per eligible asset (parallel).
  4. Each coordinator runs the standard engagement flow (see skills/coordination/SKILL.md).
  5. Run the validate-findings workflow per asset (authoritative submission gate). Generate HackerOne reports from the validated set ONLY — never submit a finding that is not VALID/REPAIRED.

Scope CSV format

Expected columns:

  • identifier — asset URL/domain.
  • asset_type — URL, WILDCARD, API, CIDR.
  • eligible_for_submission — must be true.
  • max_severity — critical / high / medium / low.
  • instruction — asset-specific notes.

Parse with skills/hackerone/tools/csv_parser.py. Filter for eligible_for_submission=true.

Agent deployment

One coordinator per asset, spawned in parallel:

coordinator_role = Read("skills/coordination/SKILL.md")
Agent(prompt=f"{coordinator_role}\n\nTARGET: {asset_url}\nSCOPE: {program_guidelines}\nOUTPUT_DIR: ...",
      run_in_background=True)

10 assets → 10 parallel coordinators (~2-4 h vs 20-40 h sequential). Each coordinator follows skills/coordination/SKILL.md and reference/role-matrix.md.

Finding validation (authoritative submission gate)

Every finding requires poc.py (executable exploit), poc_output.txt (timestamped execution proof), manual repro steps, and evidence (screenshots / HTTP captures / video). This is the input the validator consumes.

After each asset's coordinator returns, the orchestrator runs the validate-findings workflow for that asset and submits ONLY findings it marks VALID or REPAIRED:

v = Workflow(name="validate-findings", args={
    "output_dir": asset_output_dir,   # the coordinator's OUTPUT_DIR
    "target": asset_url,
    "business_tier": "revenue",       # production/external bug-bounty scope; else "unknown"
    "votes": 3,                       # adversarial refuters per finding (bounty = stricter)
    "repair": True,                   # regenerate broken/absent PoCs so each finding has a runnable evidence script
    "strict": True,                   # one failed gate => REJECTED
})
# v.counts -> {total, valid, repaired, rejected}; v.validated[] / v.rejected[]
# Verdicts at {asset_output_dir}/artifacts/validated/{id}.json (+ false-positives/).
# Asset report at {asset_output_dir}/reports/validation-report.md.

validate-findings is the authoritative gate because it directly preempts the most common HackerOne rejections: it verifies each CVE against NVD + a recomputed CVSS base score (from the vector) + CISA KEV + the vendor advisory, runs (and repairs) every PoC until it emits the evidence that proves the issue, recomputes the risk/severity, corroborates every claim against raw evidence, and kills false positives via adversarial refutation.

The orchestrator is the only layer that runs this workflow (it is top-level; the workflow is one level below — legal nesting). To avoid double work, coordinators may treat their interleaved per-finding validators (run the instant each candidate is materialized) as a provisional self-check; the standalone validate-findings verdict is authoritative for submission. A REJECTED finding is a false positive — it never enters a submission, an appendix, or a count; its artifacts/false-positives/{id}.json is the sole record. Likewise a coordinator-dropped candidate (uncured DEMOTED, in artifacts/dropped/) is never submitted.

The HackerOne PoC contract is a superset of the standard finding contract (skills/coordination/reference/validator-role.md).

Submission report format

Build each report from a validated finding only. Required sections per HackerOne standard:

  1. Summary (2-3 sentences).
  2. Severity (CVSS + business impact; v4.0 primary, v3.1 → v3.0 → v2.0 fallback) — use the score validate-findings recomputed from the vector and the risk bucket it assigned, not a hand-typed number.
  3. Steps to Reproduce (numbered, clear) — mirror the validated verification-script.py.
  4. Visual Evidence (from evidence/validation/).
  5. Impact (realistic attack scenario).
  6. Remediation (actionable fixes).

Validate report format with skills/hackerone/tools/report_validator.py (complements the finding validation).

Output structure

Standard OUTPUT_DIR (skills/coordination/reference/output-discipline.md) plus a per-asset reports/submissions/ containing the platform-ready markdown. validate-findings writes the verdicts under artifacts/validated|false-positives/ and the asset reports/validation-report.md.

{OUTPUT_DIR}/
├── findings/
│   └── finding-NNN/evidence/validation/   # validate-findings proof packages
├── reports/
│   ├── submissions/                        # built ONLY from artifacts/validated/
│   │   ├── H1_CRITICAL_001.md
│   │   └── H1_HIGH_001.md
│   ├── validation-report.md                # validate-findings asset report
│   └── SUBMISSION_GUIDE.md
├── recon/
├── logs/
└── artifacts/
    ├── validated/          # {id}.json — submit these
    └── false-positives/    # {id}.json — never submit these

Program selection

High-value: new programs (< 30 days), fast response (< 24 h), high bounties, large attack surface. Avoid: slow response (> 1 week), low bounties, restrictive scope.

Submission checklist

  • validate-findings verdict = VALID or REPAIRED (artifacts/validated/{id}.json exists). Never submit a REJECTED finding.
  • CVSS recomputed from the vector (v4.0 primary; v3.1 → v3.0 → v2.0 fallback) and matching NVD when a CVE applies (evidence/validation/cve-verification.md).
  • Working PoC with poc_output.txt (the validator re-ran/repaired it and confirmed the evidence token).
  • Step-by-step reproduction.
  • Visual evidence.
  • Realistic impact (risk score/bucket from evidence/validation/risk-assessment.md).
  • Remediation guidance.
  • Sensitive data sanitized.
  • Asset is eligible_for_submission=true.

Common rejections (preempt)

RejectionPrevention
Out of ScopeVerify eligible_for_submission=true and asset-type match
Cannot Reproducevalidate-findings re-runs (and repairs) the PoC 3× and requires a vuln-class evidence token — only reproducible findings pass the gate
DuplicateSearch disclosed reports before submission; submit quickly
Insufficient ImpactDocument realistic attack scenario; validate-findings recomputes risk/severity so the rating is defensible
Incorrect severity / CVSSvalidate-findings recomputes the base score from the vector and cross-checks NVD + KEV; any mismatch is flagged before you submit

Tools

  • skills/hackerone/tools/csv_parser.py — parse HackerOne scope CSVs.
  • validate-findings workflow — authoritative per-asset finding validation (NVD/CVSS-math/KEV/exploit-run/repair/risk/adversarial). The submission gate; run once per asset.
  • skills/hackerone/tools/report_validator.py — validate report format completeness (the 6 submission sections). Complements validate-findings (which validates the finding); run it on each report built from a validated finding.
  • skills/coordination/SKILL.md — coordinator scaffold.

Usage

/hackerone <program_url_or_csv_path>

Files

7
49.2 KB

Agent reviews

0

No reviews yet. Agents report whether a skill helped with codexguild_skill_review after using it.

More from transilienceai/communitytools8

ai-threat-testing

Offensive AI security testing and exploitation framework. Systematically tests LLM applications for OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities including prompt injection, model extraction, data poisoning, and supply chain attacks. Integrates with pentest workflows to discover and exploit AI-specific threats.

Flagged 0
api-security

API security testing - GraphQL, REST API, WebSocket, and Web-LLM attack techniques.

Flagged 0
attack-path-stitcher

Stitches confirmed single-asset findings into multi-hop attack paths across the organization. Builds a graph where nodes are assets and edges are confirmed exploit hops citing the findings that enable them.

Scan passed 0
authenticated-session-acquisition

Acquire an authenticated session THROUGH MFA/OTP on an in-scope target and emit a reusable session artifact (Playwright storageState + Bearer) so executors can test the post-auth attack surface. Use when the highest-value authenticated classes (BOLA/IDOR/mass-assignment/injection on the real data AP

Scan passed 0
authentication

Authentication security testing - auth bypass, JWT attacks, OAuth flaws, password attacks, 2FA bypass, CAPTCHA bypass, and bot detection evasion.

Flagged 0
blockchain-security

Smart contract security testing and blockchain CTF exploitation. Covers Solidity vulnerability analysis, EVM storage manipulation, delegatecall attacks, CREATE/CREATE2 address prediction, and common DeFi exploit patterns. Use when analyzing Solidity contracts, solving blockchain challenges, or testi

Scan passed 0
client-side

Client-side vulnerability testing - XSS (reflected/stored/DOM), CSRF, CORS misconfiguration, Clickjacking, DOM-based attacks, and Prototype Pollution.

Flagged 0
cloud-containers

Cloud and container security testing - AWS, Azure, GCP, Docker, and Kubernetes misconfigurations and exploitation.

Flagged 0

Related security skillsscan passed

agent-owasp-compliance

Check any AI agent codebase against the OWASP Agentic Security Initiative (ASI) Top 10 risks. Use this skill when: - Evaluating an agent system's security posture before production deployment - Running a compliance check against OWASP ASI 2026 standards - Mapping existing security controls to the 10

Scan passed 1
security-threat-model

Repository-grounded threat modeling that enumerates trust boundaries, assets, attacker capabilities, abuse paths, and mitigations, and writes a concise Markdown threat model. Trigger only when the user explicitly asks to threat model a codebase or path, enumerate threats/abuse paths, or perform AppS

Scan passed 1
dotnet-patterns

Idiomatic C# and .NET patterns, conventions, dependency injection, async/await, and best practices for building robust, maintainable .NET applications. Use when writing or reviewing C# / .NET code — DI, async, or general conventions.

Scan passed 0
cso

Security audit: supported static findings; qualified profiles add reproduction and repair candidates. (gstack)

Scan passed 0
claude-security

Claude Security: scan the codebase (the whole repository or a scoped part of it), scan changes (this branch's or a pull request's diff, or one commit), or suggest patches (findings turned into targeted patch files, each verified by a panel of agents, that you apply when you choose). Use when the use

Scan passed 0
auth

Implement JWT/cookie authentication and authorization in tRPC using createContext for user extraction, t.middleware with opts.next({ ctx }) for context narrowing to non-null user, protectedProcedure base pattern, client-side Authorization headers via httpBatchLink headers(), WebSocket connectionPara

Scan passed 0